[Python-Dev] Aligning the packaging.python.org theme with the rest of the docs

[Guido van Rossum]

Are you also going to stop others from using the psf theme?

On May 27, 2017 11:35, "Brett Cannon" <brett at python.org> wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, 26 May 2017 at 21:28 Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> Over on https://github.com/pypa/python-packaging-user-guide/
>> pull/305#issuecomment-304169735
>> we're looking to update the theming of packaging.python.org to match
>> that of the language documentation at docs.python.org.
>>
>> Doing that would also entail updating the documentation of the
>> individual tools and services (pip, pypi, setuptools, wheel, etc) to
>> maintain consistency with the main packaging user guide, so Jon has
>> tentatively broken the theme out as a (not yet published anywhere)
>> "pypa-theme" package to make it easier to re-use across multiple
>> projects.
>>
>> The question that occurred to me is whether or not it might make more
>> sense to instead call that package "psf-docs-theme", to reflect that
>> it's intended specifically for projects that are legally backed by the
>> PSF, and that general Python projects looking for a nice,
>> high-contrast, theme should consider using an org independent one like
>> Alabaster instead.
>>
>> Thoughts? Should we stick with pypa-theme as the name? Switch to
>> psf-docs-theme? Publish both, with pypa-theme adding PyPA specific
>> elements to a more general psf-docs-theme?
>>
>
> If we're going to share the theme beyond docs.python.org it makes sense
> to have a shared theme under the Python org that can easily be reused by
> multiple sets of documentation.
>
> As for the name, the psf-docs-theme seems fine with me.
>
> -Brett
>
>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Nick.
>>
>> P.S. In case folks aren't aware of the full legal arrangements here:
>> in addition to the informal "Python Packaging Authority" designation,
>> there's also a formally constituted PSF Packaging Working Group that
>> provides the legal connection back to the PSF. That means the
>> relationship between PyPA and the PSF ends up being pretty similar to
>> the one between python-dev and the PSF, where there's no direct PSF
>> involvement in day to day development activities, but the PSF provides
>> the legal and financial backing needed to sustainably maintain popular
>> community-supported software and services.
>>
>> Part of my rationale for suggesting the inclusion of "psf" in the
>> package name is to make it clear that the intent would be to create a
>> clear and distinctive "trade dress" for the documentation of directly
>> PSF backed projects:
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_dress#Protection_for_
>> electronic_interfaces_and_websites
>>
>> Future requests to use the theme (beyond CPython and the PyPA) could
>> then be run through the PSF Trademarks committee, as with requests to
>> use the registered marks.
>>
>> Whereas if we go with pypa-theme, then that would just be a
>> non-precedent-setting agreement between PyPA and CPython to share a
>> documentation theme, without trying to define any form of
>> documentation trade dress for the PSF in general.
>>
>> --
>> Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
>> _______________________________________________
>> Python-Dev mailing list
>> Python-Dev at python.org
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
>> Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/
>> brett%40python.org
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/
> guido%40python.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20170527/0fd4a016/attachment.html>